- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3095 WP No. 101144 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.101144 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SIDDAPPA RUDRAPPA KAYAKAD S/O. RUDRAPPA KAYAKAD AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, OCC. BARBER, R/O. TIMMANGATTI ROAD, TQ. RATTIHALH, DISTRICT: HAVERI-581116, LEASE HOLDER OF SHOP NO.19, SITUATED AT MUSAFEER BUNGLOW SITE, RATTIHALLI TOWN PANCHAYAT SHOP. 2. SHIVANANDAPPA HANMANTHAPPA BASAPUR, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. SANNAGUBBI ONI, TQ. RATTIHALLI, DISTRICT: HAVERI -581116. LEASE HOLDER OF SHOP NO.1, SITUATED AT AKKIPETH, S. K. HIGH SCHOOL ROAD, RATTIHALLI TOWN PANCHAYAT COMPLEX. 3. NINGAPPA KAYAKAD, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC. BARBER, R/O. KOTI ONI, TQ. RATTIHALLI, DISTRICT HAVERI-581116. LEASE HOLDER OF SHOP NO.22, SITUATED AT MUSAFEER BUNGLOW SITE, RATTIHALLI TOWN PANCHAYAT COMPLEX. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. VEENA V., AND SRI SHIVAKUMAR APARAJ., ADVOCATES) ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3095 WP No. 101144 of 2025 AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HAVERI, HAVERI DISTRICT-581110. 2. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL HAVERI, HAVERI DISTRICT-581110. 3. THE CHIEF OFFICER, TOWN PANCHAYAT, RATTIHALLI, TQ. RATTIHALLI, HAVERI DISTRICT-581116. 4. THE TAHSILDAR RATTIHALLI, TQ. RATTIHALLI, HAVERI DISTRICT-581110. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.S.KALASURMATH., AGA FOR R1, 2 AND R4; SRI S.G.KADADAKATTI., ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO: 1. ISSUE AN ORDER, DIRECTION OR WRIT IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER BEARING NO. NAM.PU.SA(4).VAHI.89/1/2024-25 DATED. 03.10.2024, ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND DAILY NEWSPAPER KOURAVA DATED. 12.02.2025 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B AND C. 2. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED. 01.02.2025 TO RENEW THE LEASE PERIOD OF THE PETITIONER FOR A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS ON ENHANCED RENT AND TO PERMIT THEM TO CONTINUE THEIR BUSINESS IN THE SHOPS BELONGING TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. 3. ISSUE ANY OTHER ORDER/DIRECTION DEEMED FIT AND PROPER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3095 WP No. 101144 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents No.1, 2 and 4. Sri S.G.Kadadakatti., learned counsel accepts notice for respondent No.3. 2. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: 1. Issue an order, direction or writ in nature of certiorari quashing the order bearing no. NAM.PU.SA(4).VAHI.89/1/2024-25 dated. 03.10.2024, issued by the 1st respondent and daily newspaper Kourava dated. 12.02.2025 produced at Annexure-B and C. 2. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation dated. 01.02.2025 to renew the lease period of the petitioner for a period of three years on enhanced rent and to permit them to continue their business in the shops belonging to the 3rd respondent. 3. Issue any other order/direction deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. 3. The grievance of the petitioners is that without initiating proceeding against the petitioners under the Public Premises Act, the petitioners have been asked - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3095 WP No. 101144 of 2025 to vacate the premises occupied by them under a lease in respondent No.3. 4. Learned AGA submits that the petitioners have been asked to vacate the premises in view of the proposed auction to be held in furtherance of a Circular dated 19.07.2019 (Amended Government Circular dated 04.11.2022). As such, no fault could be found therewith. 5. Having gone through Circular dated 19.07.2019 (Amended Government Circular dated 04.11.2022), it is seen that in terms of Circular, a tenant occupying the premises leased by a village/Town Panchayat or a Municipality has an option to participate in the auction proposed to be held by the said Authority and in the event of the tenant succeeding in the auction, the tenant can continue to be in possession of the premises in question since respondents would be obligated to execute necessary agreement in terms of the said Circular. In the event of tenant not participating in the auction proceedings, the tenant - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3095 WP No. 101144 of 2025 also has a right to exercise his right of first refusal upon the auction being completed by making payment of a sum 10% over and above the auction price. If the tenants were to exercise such right of first refusal and agree to make payment of 10% over and above the auction price, the Respondents would be obligated to execute necessary leased documents in favour of the tenant as per the terms of the auction. 6. Thus, it would be premature now for the respondents to seek for and direct the petitioners to vacate the premises until completion of the auction proceedings and the exercise of the rights conferred under Circular dated 19.07.2019 (Amended Circular dated 11.04.2022) by the tenant. 7. It is only if the petitioners were not to participated in the auction, or if participating in the auction not being successful, or if having not participated in the auction or not exercising the right to first refusal, then the respondents would be entitled to take such action - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3095 WP No. 101144 of 2025 under the Public Premises Act as may be applicable. In that view of the matter, I pass the following : ORDER (i) Writ petition is partly allowed. (ii) Petitioners are permitted to participate in the auction to be held in terms of Annexure-B daily newspaper ‘Kourava’ dated 12.02.2025 and Annexure-C being the auction notification dated 10.02.2025 issued by the 3nd respondent as per the observation made herein above. (iii) Liberty is reserved to the Panchayat to take action in terms of the above observations if the Petitioners were not to succeed in the auction and or not exercising the Right to First refusal. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE AM,CKK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3